Ase Submission

ASE Submission

Run this audit before uploading to ase26.hotcrp.com. ASE research papers are published in the proceedings of the IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, indexed in both IEEE Xplore and the ACM Digital Library. Every number below was read from the ASE 2026 research-track call on 2026-07-09 via search renderings of the conf.researchr.org URLs (see resources/official-source-map.md); treat them as a one-cycle snapshot and reopen the live call first.

Calendar and portal

• Portal: HotCRP at ase26.hotcrp.com. NIER, Tools-and-Datasets, and Journal-First each have their own site/track — do not upload a research paper to the wrong one.
• ASE 2026 research dates: submission 26 March 2026, notification 25 May 2026 (Munich, Oct 12-16 2026). The exact abstract-registration deadline that precedes the full-paper deadline is 待核实 — confirm it, because a missed abstract registration can forfeit the submission slot.
• As of 2026-07-09 the ASE 2026 notification has passed; the next submission target is ASE 2027 (host/dates 待核实). Reverify the whole calendar before acting.

Format and page budget

• Template: for ASE 2026, the ACM Primary Article (Proceedings) Template — \documentclass[sigconf,review,anonymous]{acmart}. Note the ASE nuance: because the conference is dual IEEE/ACM sponsored, the mandated template has varied across editions (an IEEE two-column format in some years, ACM acmart sigconf for 2026). Confirm which the current call requires before you format anything — carrying an old IEEEtran or acmart habit forward is a classic ASE mistake.
• Page budget: 10 pages for all content — text, figures, tables, and appendices — plus 2 pages for references only. There is no unlimited appendix inside the paper; anything a reviewer must read to judge the work lives inside the 10 pages.
• Mandatory Data Availability Statement: placed after the Conclusions and inside the 10-page limit. It is not optional and it is not free space — budget for it.
• Accepted papers are typically allowed one additional content page for revisions; do not pre-spend it in the submission.

Double-anonymous sweep

ASE runs double-anonymous review: author names and affiliations are omitted and prior work is cited in the third person. Automated-SE papers leak identity through their tools more than their prose, so the surface is wide:

# Mechanical pass on the submission PDF and any anonymized artifact archive
pdfinfo paper.pdf | grep -Ei 'author|creator|producer'
pdftotext paper.pdf - | grep -nEi 'github\.com/[a-z0-9-]+|gitlab|zenodo\.org/record|acknowledg|grant' | head
unzip -l artifact.zip | grep -Ei '\.git/|\.DS_Store|/home/|/Users/' | head
grep -rniE 'university|@[a-z0-9.]*\.edu|our (tool|group|lab)|named after' artifact/ --include='*.md' | head

The ASE-specific leaks: a tool named after your lab or a prior project, a screenshot of an IDE showing a username, a Data Availability link pointing at a personal GitHub, commit metadata inside a zipped repository, subject-system paths under /home/<you>/, and self-citations phrased in the first person. Re-host the tool and dataset behind an anonymizing service before upload.

Data Availability and open science at submission time

• The Data Availability Statement is required and reviewed. State what exists (tool, dataset, scripts, logs), where it will live after acceptance, and provide an anonymized link or upload now.
• "Available upon request" reads as a scored weakness, not a neutral choice. If you genuinely cannot share (industrial confidentiality, license limits), say so and why.
• For automated-SE tools: pin the exact commit, subject-system versions/SHAs, configuration, and seeds; cache any LLM outputs now — they cannot be reconstructed at review time.

Desk-risk triage

Final-week order of operations

1. Freeze the body early; references can churn, the argument cannot.
2. Register title/abstract/authors/conflicts before the (earlier) abstract deadline.
3. Anonymize the tool and dataset, re-host behind an anonymizing service, and write the Data Availability Statement after Conclusions.
4. Run the mechanical anonymity checks on the final PDF and the final archive, not drafts.
5. Fill every HotCRP field — area tags that match your automation, conflicts for every coauthor's institution and recent collaborators — a day early; late conflicts are the classic failure.
6. Re-download the uploaded PDF and read it cold to confirm it is the file you meant.

Reverify each cycle

• The required template (IEEE two-column vs. ACM acmart) and the page budget.
• The abstract-registration and submission deadlines, and whether the year runs one submission cycle or more.
• Data Availability wording, artifact-track timing, dual-submission wording, and any AI-disclosure rule — all cycle-volatile.

Output format

[ASE submission status] ready / blocked / needs work
[Registration] abstract/authors/conflicts locked by the earlier deadline? yes/no
[Format] template (acmart sigconf? IEEE?), pages used (content/refs), Data Availability present & inside 10pp?
[Anonymity] clean / leaks: <where, incl. tool name>
[Open science] anonymized tool + dataset link present?
[Fix queue] <ordered, with owners and dates before the deadline>